To not really understand the problem with driving in the middle lane?

[BrokenSunglasses]

I've done a lot of motorway driving recently, and it's got me thinking, because I don't really understand when it's ok to be in the middle lane and when it's not.

I've worked out that its ok to stay in the middle lane when there's lots of cars/lorries on the inside lane and I'm going faster, but how long is it ok to stay in the middle lane when there's nothing right next to you on the inside lane?

Sometimes I stay in there longer than I perhaps should, but that's either because I can see that I'd only have to move out again in a minute because there's a slow moving lorry ahead, or because I can see a junction coming up and there will be cars filtering onto the the motorway.

I did that yesterday, and got flashed a lot by a van behind me, but it was raining so the visibility was crap, and I'd have had to slow down and be too close behind the car that was on the inside lane and would have been able to see even less because of the spray. It seems to me to be sensible to leave lots of space inbetween vehicles when it's raining, but this van made me doubt myself. He overtook me in the outside lane eventually, and I thought he should have just done that in the first place because that's what it's there for.

Was I being a lane hog or was he being a twat?

I really don't get it.

Police can be wrong sometimes, love. I hope it is not something new for you.

"unless the magistratesl find against the police officer..."

There you go. It is a judgement call and people will be prepared to go to courts for it. It is not black and white like driving 31mph in 30mph zone.

There you go.

Indeed. You only read part of my post originally, didn't you 'love'.

love was to the poster Ilovemyself

I think you are a bit sensitive.

Incidentally, I am all for punishing MLH, tailgaters, aggressive driving etc. I was only pointing that these measures will be v v difficult to enforce.

Former head of roads policing said the following ?Careless driving has 50 shades of grey and it will end up being the motorist?s word against the copper.
?But it will help those motorists who realise they have done something wrong and would rather not be dragged through the courts.?

I don't actually think it is good to punish the broadly law-abiding drivers, who made a mistake and accept it and effectively let the habitually aggressive deniers get away scott free.

link here

Bemybebe. It's not JUST the police though. It is also the view of the government department responsible for it. So yes, the police can be wrong but in this case they are working with the responsible department

It's an empty gesture and cynical populism.

Whether these people deserve it or not, where will the traffic police who are going to impose these fines come from, given that police numbers are going to be cut by 20 per cent?

Having more officers around would be a better move if we were truly concerned about road safety. But they cost money.

Anyway I don't travel much on motorways so it doesn't affect me. If the Government were to announce the death penalty for people who stand on the left on escalators on the Underground that would be wildly popular as well and more easily enforced.

Also, all the rush-hour hoggers at Waterloo and Victoria stations, who cannot make up their minds which platform their train departs from (that will be you all the disabled, parents with toddlers and foreigners)... death penalty on the spot.

Yeah, those people who dot randomly about the concourse in Victoria staring at the boards get in my way too. Especially the ones who suddenly step back without looking to get a better focus.

I think you are a bit sensitive.

You're probably right, bemybebe.

I apologise for my sarcastic response.

i've watched ivy's link.they mention driving in the middle lane at 50 mph,so very below the speed limit.driving at 70 would not cause congestion,other then to the very fast drivers,so there

love it is not a case of saying the HA or the police are wrong. Surely you do not really think tailgaters are not at fault for dangerous and aggressive driving because they are tailgating a middle laner? If a tailgater went into the car in front they would be at fault for being too close not the car in front. As annoying and sometimes dangerous a middle lane hog can be it is no excuse for tailgating.

I think if someone is a tailgater they are a tailgater whether it is someone in their way on a motorway or someone doing 30mph in a built up area not being fast enough for them.

Saying that MLHs are wrong doesn't mean that tail gaters aren't, though.

PBM. Iam not so much thinking of tailgaters, who are wrong. I do think the system is exacerbated by mlh though. Think about it logically - if mlh didn't exist then tailgaters wouldn't either.

And I wish people would stop whining about the 70 mph limit. There are road users who are permitted to break the speed limit of 70 mph on the motorway and a mlh is a danger to them.

You get tailgaters everywhere: motorways, country roads, dual carriageways, built up areas etc. They will always exist somewhere and they tailgate even if someone is trying to overtake because they are impatient and cannot wait until someone has completed the overtaking. Or on single roads they think you should be going faster even if you are doing the speed limit or think you should be driving as dangerously as them when the road conditions are bad. On a motorway it is fairly easy to let the nutter go on past but when you are on a single road it isn't as easy.

Even if someone is hogging the middle lane, the driver behind doesn't need to tailgate because there is a 3rd or 4th lane so they won't be stuck behind the hogger the whole time. Going up close behind to prove a point instead of using the other lane/s is just as bad as someone staying in the outside lane at 70mph to prove a point. They are both idiots.

PBM. This thread is about middle lane hoggers on the motorway. That's what we are discussing so why go on about other scenarios.

The point is mlh are a danger to other road users at 50 ( a danger to all other motorway users ) or at 70 to any emergency service. That is the point that you seem not to want to accept.

"This thread is about middle lane hoggers on the motorway. That's what we are discussing so why go on about other scenarios."

Who died and make you the thread police?!

Come now. Middle lane hoggers aren't really a danger in most circumstances. They are, however, an irritant, as I distressingly find with many other people with whom I'm forced to share my world.

Do try to remain calm.

Candycoated. What I was getting at was that people are using other issues to take the heat off the real subject. :-)

Yet another long motorway drive, tomorrow, for work.

I am actually frightened at the prospect, having read this thread through.

Well considering you said middle lane hoggers are the cause of tailgaters to do dangerous and aggressive driving I think it was relevant to talk about other scenarios. Everything I have said in arguement against this theory has been true, tailgaters are responsible for their own driving, frustration and aggression so blaming the middle lane hog is nonsense. If the tailgater went into the back of someone it would be their fault for getting too close.

Limitedperiodonly that is very true. They are just one of many things people do on the motorway which is irritating. The best thing to do is to just stay calm and try not to get too worked up about things. We all have a little curse about something on the road about different things.

Ok PBM. So you are a greater knowledge than the highways agency and the police. I bow to your knowledge.